The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 24

[Vixen]

You have still failed to provide any evidence of your claims that:

1)

2)

The "news item" comes from TMofMK but provides no evidence of WHY Duncan was banned. Their unverified claims are as credible as TJMK's unverified claims...i.e. not at all.




There is so much wrong with the above sentence that it's bound to become a Vixen classic.
I'll repeat, the autopsy photos are part of the court record and are not "private" as you falsely claim.

The autopsy photos form part of medical records and are ipso facto confidential. The photos in the case files were for court purposes only, not for Amanda and Raff to hand around to their chums for dissemination.

Anybody reading this knows it is most improper to circulate autopsy photographs. I am surprised that you are arguing that there is nothing wrong with it.

Duncan was banned from twitter for her vaseline posts to the murder victim's family. It takes a lot for twitter to BAN an account (hate crime, terrorists) being as it is situated in the US where free speech is sovereign.

 

[Numbers]

I didn't have to go to wikipedia as I had a good education.

Well, I am happy that you had a good education, as you state in your quoted post.

However, one should have learned in a good education to rely on reference sources in those areas where one's expertise or knowledge may have some limitations. It's unfortunate your knowledge of the relevant symbols as commonly used in math, engineering, and science, which was clearly defective despite your possible assumption otherwise, did not produce a communication that others could comprehend.
_______
ETA: Did your good education also provide you with the value of 30 seconds - or minutes - for the time for blood to dry? And at what temperature? Did you do the scientific research to determine this on your own? Or do you have some citation(s) for the value?
_____

Perhaps you should stick to Newtonian physics, as in the rock throwing calculations. LOL.

 

[Vixen]

Well...




Then, why do you think Amanda Knox (or anyone else on the PIP side) has control over the people who made the posts you provided screenshots of in your post?


See above... If you are resorting to the "Am I my brother's keeper?" defence, why shouldn't I do the same? AND your post above still isn't an answer to my question:

Guess, I will not get a real answer, if any...


Once again... :




The discussion above, proved you wrong, I guess...


Nice fake outrage, flavoured with Daily Mail style over a quite fact based "tongue in cheek" article by Mr Fischer...
Is that all you have left?

Amanda Knox followed Annella on twitter! She encourages hate comments on her blog. Like Bruce Fischer, without any moderation or respect for the Data Protection act.

Amanda's own webhost recklessly libels anybody he perceives to be a 'hater'. For example, one perfectly decent chap is described by this criminal as 'a drunk', when he does not drink at all. I say criminal, because breaching the Data Protection Act is a criminal offence, as well as a civil one.

G Rhodes does not own any sites, does not run any forums, is not a moderator of any comments or blogs.

Why are we not surprised you condone the activities of your lunatic fringe, instead of distancing yourself.

 

[Vixen]

Well, I am happy that you had a good education, as you state in your quoted post.

However, one should have learned in a good education to rely on reference sources in those areas where one's expertise or knowledge may have some limitations. It's unfortunate your knowledge of the relevant symbols as commonly used in math, engineering, and science, which was clearly defective despite your possible assumption otherwise, did not produce a communication that others could comprehend.
_______
ETA: Did your good education also provide you with the value of 30 seconds - or minutes - for the time for blood to dry? And at what temperature? Did you do the scientific research to determine this on your own? Or do you have some citation(s) for the value?
_____

Perhaps you should stick to Newtonian physics, as in the rock throwing calculations. LOL.

It is common knowledge.

 

[Vixen]

No need to save it as it's still posted on TJMK as you've already been shown. But nice touch using the word "slaver". I've always been impressed, yet at the same time disgusted, by your use of manipulative language.

If you were so appalled by Rhodes' letter, whatever possessed you to publish it here in full?

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm sure I did, but here it is again. I am sure some posters will remember this.

Your link does not support your claim that blood dries in 30 minutes under the circumstances of the night of the murder.

"A study published in the International Journal of Legal Medicine reported that a blood drop on a hard surface in a typical indoor setting at 20 degrees Celsius is completely dry in 60 minutes. Increasing the temperature to 24 degrees Celsius reduces the drying time to only 30 minutes. "

The temperature in the unheated cottage that night was not 24C/75F. The high temperature that day was in the mid-forties and even colder that night. That's why people were all wearing coats. The lower the temperature, the longer it takes blood to dry.

 

[Vixen]

Rents are generally due on the first of every month. Dempsey, in her book on page 40, states that this was true for everyone in Perugia, including the girls in the cottage, Guede, and Raffaele. She also states that Perugia landlords did not accept checks so payments were made in cash.

Now, who was the only person of this group who had no money to pay their rent, was unemployed, and had a history of breaking and entering, stealing, and being in the possession of stolen property?

Candace Dempsey, the hack from Seattle, who thought she'd write a book from the Friends of Amanda POV? That one?


How thoughtful of her to chip in and offer Amanda a few 'explanations' she could use to explain various suspicious things.

Her claim is clearly rubbish.

 

[Stacyhs]

If you were so appalled by Rhodes' letter, whatever possessed you to publish it here in full?

Nice try, but no cigar. Try again.

 

[Bill Williams]

Amanda Knox followed Annella on twitter! She encourages hate comments on her blog. Like Bruce Fischer, without any moderation or respect for the Data Protection act.

Amanda's own webhost recklessly libels anybody he perceives to be a 'hater'. For example, one perfectly decent chap is described by this criminal as 'a drunk', when he does not drink at all. I say criminal, because breaching the Data Protection Act is a criminal offence, as well as a civil one.

G Rhodes does not own any sites, does not run any forums, is not a moderator of any comments or blogs.
Why are we not surprised you condone the activities of your lunatic fringe, instead of distancing yourself.

The hypocrisy of this post is dripping. G Rhodes has not, as of yet, been moderated for his death threat on that other site. That site, by your own definition, encourages it by leaving it there.

On the other hand - once again - you provide no examples for your claims above other than that, "Amanda Knox followed Annella on twitter" Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, that sounds very sinister. And then you point to a piece of UK legislation..... about the protection of personal data, with nothing whatsoever to do with "wreckless libel".

Once again, you've simply invented something. Why do you do that?

But don't rely on me, I abhor Twitter. Never been on it and never will.

 

[Numbers]

It is common knowledge.

You have gotten it wrong, LOL. Must have been the hypothetical typo of a figure of speech.

Double primes (") indicate seconds of time (among other units), not minutes. So you got that wrong.

Blood on a surface with ambient temperature of 20 C (room temperature) takes about 60 minutes to dry, as the reference I provided found by scientific experiment. Lower ambient temperature results in even longer drying times. The cottage was certainly at 20 C or less on the relevant night, Nov. 1, 2006.
So you got that wrong.

 

[Vixen]

Those are cases where it was not possible to ascertain TOD because access to the body was impossible. That was not the case here. A more narrow TOD was possible to determine but it was ineptly allowed to expire because Mignini would not allow Lalli to do what Lalli wanted to do; take the body temperature.

Circumstantial evidence does not support the 11:00-11:30 TOD.

Not even taking into account the phone calls, it's highly unlikely that Meredith would have arrived home at 9:00, after leaving her friends' place early because she was tired, and still be fully dressed (except for shoes) including her hoodie at 11:00 to 11:30. It's far more likely that she would have come home and changed soon into her night clothes for comfort. The fact her shoes were off is more indicative that she had come home, gone into her room, and removed her shoes in preparation for getting undressed. If you are honest, you would also recognize that one of the first things we women do in the evening is remove our bras. We don't stay fully dressed that late at night, especially if we are home alone.

LOL. Changing as soon as I come home is a habit I have had since schooldays*. No, IIRC Mez did not take off her own daps, they were removed by her attackers. Her socks were strewn around. If she had taken off her daps, she would surely have also taken off her socks, as she would have slid around in them otherwise.

*However, Mez was already wearing comfortable casual wear when she popped around to her friends for pizza and a film, so no great compulsion to change there.

 

[Numbers]

How about a trip down memory lane to investigate the accuracy of the predictions of a pro-guilt poster and a pro-innocence poster?

Posted by Vixen, #2624 in Continuation 18, 22 Sep 2015:
….
It might have escaped you but the issue of calunnia is res judicata, which means legally decided and can be decided no more. Bruno-Marasca did throw out the aggravated part of calunnia "because of guilt in the murder".

In addition, your heroine is now currently undergoing a repeat offence of calunnia. How will that look to the ECHR?

As Oscar Wilde said, or was it Karl Marx, "Once in history is a tragedy, twice is a farce" and "to lose your wife once is unfortunate, but twice is carelessness".

So don't stock up on the ECHR popcorn just yet.

Will it be an open court? If so, I might hop on a train to Brussels (?) to watch that.

Posted by Kauffer, #2627 in Continuation 18, 22 Sep 2015:

The issue of res judicata in Italy in relation to ECHR findings of Art 6 human rights violations was adjudicated some years ago. As a result and constitutionally at that, an ECHR finding trumps an Italian court decision. Res judicata is set aside. The current callunia trial, which will never be completed, is simply more grist to Amanda's mill. Where else in the world can a defendant be indicted for offering a defence on the witness stand alleging an assault, such an allegation, of course, which was never investigated?

The matter is not complex, though seemingly not understood by the Italian Supreme court - lawyerless statements cannot be used to convict. This includes verbal and written statements and takes in Mignini's interview with Amanda and the 1st memoriale. This is Italian law!
____
April 5, 2007 analysis:

1. Final definitive convictons in Italy may be reversed by revision trials under certain circumstances; final definitive acquittals are indeed final.

For example, Rudy Guede requested permission to have a revision trial. He was denied permission by the Florence appeal court; I believe (but am not certain) that he is appealing this to the CSC.

If the ECHR finds that Italy violated Amanda Knox's rights under the Convention in convicting her of calunnia against Patrick Lumumba, then, according to a judgment of the Italian Constitutional Court, she will be entitled to request a revision trial. However, it cannot be assured that Italy will grant her one. If Italy does not, however, it will set itself up for another ECHR case and considerable pressure from the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

2. The Marasca CSC panel quashed the Nencini court's "aggravated" calunnia conviction of Knox on the grounds that there were no aggravating circumstances.

3. The charge against Knox of calunnia against the police and Mignini led to an acquittal by the Boninsegna court; it was not simply allowed to expire due to the statute of limitations as suggested by Kauffer.

The ECHR in its Communication to Italy for Knox v. Italy was very interested in the Boninsegna judgment and wished to determine if it was final or being appealed. Since it is final and definitive - the prosecution having chosen not to appeal - the ECHR will certainly find it of interest, but as a guide to the violations of Knox's rights by the Italian authorities, rather than as material against Knox's claims against Italy.

4. Lastly, it is rather humorous that the pro-guilt poster was so uninformed about the ECHR that the poster thought (with some doubt) that the ECHR is located in Brussels.

"The Court is based in Strasbourg, France."
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights

{An example of how a little library or online research can be helpful, even to those with a "good education". LOL!}

 

[Stacyhs]

Candace Dempsey, the hack from Seattle, who thought she'd write a book from the Friends of Amanda POV? That one?


How thoughtful of her to chip in and offer Amanda a few 'explanations' she could use to explain various suspicious things.
Her claim is clearly rubbish.

Oh, dear. The rent was clearly due which is why Meredith had the cash ready to give to Laura. Sheesh. Use some logic.

According to Follain:

"Later that day, Filomena and Laura reminded Amanda and Meredith that the rent was due the following week, by 5 November."

"November 1st, 2007, nearing the due date of the monthly rent payment" (Massie MR)

I will concede it was not due on the first of Nov, but it was due on the 5th.
But I have to wonder if it was only due on the 5th that month due to the holiday that week? The 5th was the Monday following the long holiday weekend.

Exactly how did Dempsey " offer Amanda a few 'explanations' she could use to explain various suspicious things"? A few examples would give some credence to yet another claim of yours.

 

[Stacyhs]

LOL. Changing as soon as I come home is a habit I have had since schooldays*. No, IIRC Mez did not take off her own daps, they were removed by her attackers. Her socks were strewn around. If she had taken off her daps, she would surely have also taken off her socks, as she would have slid around in them otherwise.

*However, Mez was already wearing comfortable casual wear when she popped around to her friends for pizza and a film, so no great compulsion to change there.

There is no evidence that Meredith did not remove her own shoes or that they were removed by her attackers. NONE.

One sock was on the bed and one by her body.
Meredith could have removed her own shoes and then removed only one sock, tossing it on the bed, and was then attacked before she removed the second sock.
The sock found by her body could have come off when her jeans were forcibly removed. I know mine slide off when I remove my jeans.

Removing her shoes does not require taking off her socks. Being cold, she could well have planned to leave her socks on before putting on her slippers. I do that.

Why would a rapist care about removing socks? They do not impede the rape.

*jeans are hardly comfortable to sit around in for 2 to 2.5 hours after arriving home at 9 PM, tired. Especially when you are the only one home. Get real.

 

[Vixen]

Once again, you've avoiding owning-up-to simply inventing, "As the perps delayed the body being found for >15 hours, it was not possible to ascertain exact time of death"

How many times have responses to you begun with - "You have completely avoided answering the questions put to you, thinking that substitution a non sequitor somehow saves your argument"?

Vixen - your reply has nothing to do WITH THE ISSUE YOU FRAUDULENTLY RAISED! You raised it, implying that the kids were responsible for the forensic people not being able to pinpoint the TOD.

Added to this is the response you made immediately above, which is a total non sequitor. We are not talking about MANY MURDERS, we are talking about this one, tragic murder. We are talking about the one which Mignini himself admitted that it was he who delayed the test for TOD for a further 24 hours!!!!

Add in your typical strawman - "Just because it is not possible to pinpoint exact TOD, doesn't mean the perp gets off." Why do you deal in so obvious and awkward strawmen arguments?

Marasca-Bruno - luckily - looked at this as competent judges. They took Nencini's finding, that finding TOD was not an important thing for this case, and said that that was judicially wrong.

With AK and RS having unassailable alibi's well into the evening of Nov 1, where neither of them knew they would be free for the evening until about 8:40 pm (Nov 1), M/B say quite rightly that pinpointing TOD is perhaps THE primary way of assessing their unassailable alibi.

Instead, Nencini just left TOD open and ignored that the investigators themselves (Mignini) were responsible for blowing this important aspect of the case. M/B implied that perhaps Nencini should have acquitted on that point alone.

Otherwise, you show absolutely little understanding of even the most basic elements of this case.

It is good enough for you that you can invent things, to make it seem that AK and RS were responsible for the delay in taking body temperature - when all AK and RS had to have done, if guilty, was go away on their planned weekend trip, leaving the grisly discovery Monday morning, rather than Friday.

Why do you invent things so?

They were only caught at the scene at all because the police turned up by sheer coincidence.

The TOD can be approximated by several means. Lalli established a wide range extending to as late as 4:00am next day. Massei took the median point of this, which was corroborated by various witnesses.

As for 'neither of them knew they were free for the evening until 8:40', well, the pair both switched off their phones shortly after. Raff after speaking to his Papa.

When Amanda rang Filomena at 12:11 she was 'scene-setting'. She didn't once ring up Filomena to say, 'your window is smashed' - something I would have thought was a HUGE elephant in the room? You can't not see her window as you approach the front door.


It was only when Filomena rang HER and the police were just arriving that she even mentioned it. I guess at that point, she had to.

As by the time Mez' body was found she had been dead for anything up to 15 hours, maximum, so it is unlikely Lalli could have found an exact time anyway.

 

[Vixen]

How about a trip down memory lane to investigate the accuracy of the predictions of a pro-guilt poster and a pro-innocence poster?

Posted by Vixen, #2624 in Continuation 18, 22 Sep 2015:
….
It might have escaped you but the issue of calunnia is res judicata, which means legally decided and can be decided no more. Bruno-Marasca did throw out the aggravated part of calunnia "because of guilt in the murder".

In addition, your heroine is now currently undergoing a repeat offence of calunnia. How will that look to the ECHR?

As Oscar Wilde said, or was it Karl Marx, "Once in history is a tragedy, twice is a farce" and "to lose your wife once is unfortunate, but twice is carelessness".

So don't stock up on the ECHR popcorn just yet.

Will it be an open court? If so, I might hop on a train to Brussels (?) to watch that.

Posted by Kauffer, #2627 in Continuation 18, 22 Sep 2015:

The issue of res judicata in Italy in relation to ECHR findings of Art 6 human rights violations was adjudicated some years ago. As a result and constitutionally at that, an ECHR finding trumps an Italian court decision. Res judicata is set aside. The current callunia trial, which will never be completed, is simply more grist to Amanda's mill. Where else in the world can a defendant be indicted for offering a defence on the witness stand alleging an assault, such an allegation, of course, which was never investigated?

The matter is not complex, though seemingly not understood by the Italian Supreme court - lawyerless statements cannot be used to convict. This includes verbal and written statements and takes in Mignini's interview with Amanda and the 1st memoriale. This is Italian law!
____
April 5, 2007 analysis:

1. Final definitive convictons in Italy may be reversed by revision trials under certain circumstances; final definitive acquittals are indeed final.

For example, Rudy Guede requested permission to have a revision trial. He was denied permission by the Florence appeal court; I believe (but am not certain) that he is appealing this to the CSC.

If the ECHR finds that Italy violated Amanda Knox's rights under the Convention in convicting her of calunnia against Patrick Lumumba, then, according to a judgment of the Italian Constitutional Court, she will be entitled to request a revision trial. However, it cannot be assured that Italy will grant her one. If Italy does not, however, it will set itself up for another ECHR case and considerable pressure from the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

2. The Marasca CSC panel quashed the Nencini court's "aggravated" calunnia conviction of Knox on the grounds that there were no aggravating circumstances.

3. The charge against Knox of calunnia against the police and Mignini led to an acquittal by the Boninsegna court; it was not simply allowed to expire due to the statute of limitations as suggested by Kauffer.

The ECHR in its Communication to Italy for Knox v. Italy was very interested in the Boninsegna judgment and wished to determine if it was final or being appealed. Since it is final and definitive - the prosecution having chosen not to appeal - the ECHR will certainly find it of interest, but as a guide to the violations of Knox's rights by the Italian authorities, rather than as material against Knox's claims against Italy.

4. Lastly, it is rather humorous that the pro-guilt poster was so uninformed about the ECHR that the poster thought (with some doubt) that the ECHR is located in Brussels.

"The Court is based in Strasbourg, France."
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights

{An example of how a little library or online research can be helpful, even to those with a "good education". LOL!}

Brussels clearly shows a question mark after it. Stop point scoring. You seriously mean to say, you've spent hours trawling old posts in order to search for points to score?

How very sad.

 

[acbytesla]

Sigh....yet more "facts" being pulled directly out of a lower body orifice. Studies actually show the opposite is true:

"Researchers at the University of Iowa have found that when it comes to memory, we don't remember things we hear nearly as well as things we see or touch." (Science Daily February 26, 2014)

"Auditory recognition memory is inferior to visual recognition memory"
(Michael A. Cohena, Todd S. Horowitza,b and Jeremy M. Wolfe, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A.)



Really? Nara Capezalli also "remembered" being told about the murder on the morning of Nov 2 by some boys and seeing posters with the names of Knox, Sollecito, Guede, and Lumumba on Nov 3...neither of which were possible considering the murder hadn't been discovered on the morning of Nov 2 and no posters with either Guede or Lumumba's names existed on Nov 3.

People "remember" things that never happened. Things that they'd swear to in a court of law. That is a proven fact. They are called "false memories" for a reason. Why can't people "imagine" things that never happened?



LOL! An expert? REALLY? Police think they are experts at discerning lies due to experience when studies show they are no better at it than non-police. And yes, I can provide evidence of that if you insist because I've researched it before. Has it occurred to you that Amanda covered her ears because the police were yelling at her and she wanted it to stop? Nah...of course not. If it doesn't support guilt, it can't be true, right?




She may have heard A scream. After all, she did say hearing screams in that area was not unusual.

Probably a neighbor having an orgasm.

 

[Vixen]

There is no evidence that Meredith did not remove her own shoes or that they were removed by her attackers. NONE.

One sock was on the bed and one by her body.
Meredith could have removed her own shoes and then removed only one sock, tossing it on the bed, and was then attacked before she removed the second sock.
The sock found by her body could have come off when her jeans were forcibly removed. I know mine slide off when I remove my jeans.

Removing her shoes does not require taking off her socks. Being cold, she could well have planned to leave her socks on before putting on her slippers. I do that.

Why would a rapist care about removing socks? They do not impede the rape.

*jeans are hardly comfortable to sit around in for 2 to 2.5 hours after arriving home at 9 PM, tired. Especially when you are the only one home. Get real.

Are you trying to make the disgusting suggestion that Mez was naked waist down and thus allowing for a single attacker, namely Rudy, who, according to the PIP theory, walking in on her whilst she was half undressed.

Pathetic. Not one single court accepted that scenario.

 

[Vixen]

Probably a neighbor having an orgasm.

This is Perugia, not Seattle.

 

[Bill Williams]

They were only caught at the scene at all because the police turned up by sheer coincidence.

The TOD can be approximated by several means. Lalli established a wide range extending to as late as 4:00am next day. Massei took the median point of this, which was corroborated by various witnesses.

As for 'neither of them knew they were free for the evening until 8:40', well, the pair both switched off their phones shortly after. Raff after speaking to his Papa.

When Amanda rang Filomena at 12:11 she was 'scene-setting'. She didn't once ring up Filomena to say, 'your window is smashed' - something I would have thought was a HUGE elephant in the room? You can't not see her window as you approach the front door.


It was only when Filomena rang HER and the police were just arriving that she even mentioned it. I guess at that point, she had to.

As by the time Mez' body was found she had been dead for anything up to 15 hours, maximum, so it is unlikely Lalli could have found an exact time anyway.

Strawman - no one talks about "exact". You're STILL ignoring that this is one thing Mignini himself took blame for.

Please address issues. Marasca/Bruno said Nencini judicially erred in saying TOD was unimportant to pin down. If body temperature had been taken when it was supposed to be, it would have provided a far narrower range.

And..... what other witnesses? You're making up things again.